Ethics Discussion
Suppose at Time 2.5, researchers tell Valegos that they are close to finishing the drug and that it should be ready to distribute to all the kids with river blindness by the end of the month. They would be the first drug company to have an effective treatment for this awful condition that affects so many people in third world countries. Valegos, is really happy and feels good about his decision to research the drug.
That night, he finds out that Pfizer, a competing drug company has put all resources and efforts into producing a new drug that prevents wrinkles. There is a huge market for this product and potential to increase profits big time. Valegos remembers that he has a team working on a similar drug and that it's almost ready, but the team needs more resources and testing. Valegos decides to shelve the river-blindness drug and devotes all teams to the drug that will prevent wrinkles. He knows by doing so, Merck will beat Pfizer to market with this new very profitable drug.
This means that the drug for treating river-blindness is on hold with no date to continue. It's not like people in third world countries could pay for it anyway and giving it away for free is costly. This also means that T3 never happens. Instead it ends at T2.5: River-blindness drug is shelved to devote more resources to wrinkle prevention drug.
Do YOU think Valegos did anything wrong? Explain whether or not YOU (your gut reaction) think his decision to shelve the river-blindness drug at Time 2.5 is ethical or unethical. Would Freeman agree or disagree with you?
The response should include a reference list. Double-space, using Times New Roman 12 pnt font, one-inch margins, and APA style of writing and citations.